The International Cycling Union (UCI) will host a roundtable discussion among key stakeholders in cycling that could see the sport move toward a stricter policy governing the participation of transgender women competing in the women’s category in high-level competition.
In an interview with Cyclingnews on Wednesday, UCI President David Lappartient outlined some of the details surrounding the roundtable meeting, including those invited to attend and the discussion topics. He confirmed that central to the discussion will be whether the current rules on transgender inclusion in the women’s category have an impact on fair competition.
“Are we able, today, to guarantee fair competition? I can’t answer ‘no,’ but I can’t answer ‘yes’”, Lappartient said. “That is why on our side, we are an international federation, we have to make solid decisions based on the current knowledge, and this is why we want to revisit the situation to review, to revisit our position and take a decision in the next coming months, probably at the beginning of July. But we want to integrate an open discussion with all the stakeholders.”
A report following the discussion could affect the decision made on transgender participation rules at the next UCI Management Committee Meeting, which will be taken either ahead of or at the Glasgow World Championships.
However, Lappartient did not confirm when any potential changes to the existing rules, if any are made, would come into effect.
“For us, there are three key points to consider. The first one that is really key is that we fully respect the right of any person to make a transition, to decide the way they want to live, and this has to be with no discrimination - it’s also written in our constitution. We fully respect the right of anyone to transition. The second point is that for transgender people, we welcome them into the cycling community,” Lappartient said.
“But the third point is the right to take part in high-level competition. Is it a fundamental right, and in which way would this affect fair competition? This third point is the one we want to answer - we want to be clear about the first two points - it’s just about how we can ensure fair competition, and that is what we have to discuss. I wanted to make it clear that we are only focused on this and not on any kind of discrimination. We are in favour of inclusion, and [trans athletes] are more than welcome in the world of cycling.”
Following the most recent UCI Management Committee Meeting in May, the sport governing body announced that it would analyse the current situation by reopening consultation with the athletes and National Federations.
It named three main objectives: To take into consideration, in the context of the evolution of our society, the desire of transgender athletes to practise cycling; Hear the voices of female athletes and their concerns about an equal playing field for competitors; And to take into account all elements, including the evolution of scientific knowledge.
Lappartient confirmed that an upcoming round-table meeting would include 10 to 15 stakeholders. Among those invited will be four transgender women and four cis-women who are currently competing athletes (road and track cycling). Also part of the discussion will be Athletes Commission President Katerina Nash, Medical Director Professor Xavier Bigard, along with human rights and scientific experts. He did not name the athletes nor the experts invited to participate in the discussion.
“We want to have a respectful debate and to see if we can agree on how we can guarantee fair competition,” Lappartient said.
The UCI’s most recent guidelines came into effect in 2022, which stipulate that transgender women athletes must declare that their gender identity is female, demonstrate that their total testosterone level in serum has been below 2.5 nmol/L for a period of at least 24 months, and then remain at 2.5nmol/L throughout the period of desired eligibility to compete in the female category.
The UCI has recently updated its published document by Dr. Bigard that outlines what it considers the current knowledge on the effects of gender-affirming treatment on markers of performance in transgender female cyclists, which will be part of the material viewed at the roundtable meeting.
A link to the updated report can be found here.
Lappartient confirmed that there had been no revisions made to the current transgender guidelines at this time. However, he outlined several potential outcomes that could happen once a full report of the roundtable meeting and relevant documentation, along with Dr. Bigard’s updated report, is considered by the UCI Management Committee.
Opponents of inclusion have argued that transgender women retain performance advantages from having gone through puberty as male, although the science behind the assertion is still investigational.
“Our rules are seen as maybe too open, and that is probably the problem. When we make the decision, it has to be based on the scientists' knowledge. As of the date today, we don’t have proof that there is an advantage, but we don’t have proof that there is no advantage. I think we might need to make some decisions in the future, but at least we have to make a decision with the current situation to put more restrictions,” Lappartient said.
“I don’t want to go directly to the conclusion because we need to have this roundtable discussion with the stakeholders. One of the solutions is to have more restrictions, not allowing [transgender athletes] to take part in women’s competition at the international level; that could be one of the options. The other option can be to modify the duration of the transition, to modify the level of testosterone; this has to be based on [scientific] knowledge. The option can be to say yes [to inclusion] up to a certain level of competition. And another option is to keep the regulations as it is now.
“We will probably have to make some evolution [to the policy] because the current knowledge will probably guide us to go to an evolution with more restriction, which level of restriction is still open for this roundtable with the stakeholders. Our decision will also be based on documents, facts, and figures and not on feelings. What is sure is that we will have more restrictions.”
Inconsistency and legality
Transgender athletes have been subjected to waves of controversy surrounding a highly-charged debate between trans rights supporters and groups that aim to protect the women’s category of sport.
The guidelines on transgender participation in Olympic sports trickle down from the IOC, and the International Federations’ structured policies differ between sports. For example, World Athletics and World Aquatics have recently announced that transgender women who have gone through male puberty can no longer compete in the female category at international events.
In cycling, there are also inconsistencies between the policy set out by the UCI and some of the National Federations, with some creating rules that are stricter than the UCI.
British Cycling, for example, has taken the decision to ban transgender women from women’s category competitions following a nine-month review. The rule change will come into effect at the end of 2023 when trans women will only be eligible to compete in a new 'open' category of races which includes the current men's category.
The decision comes after British athlete Emily Bridges was excluded from competing at this National Omnium Championships in April 2022. Bridges described the ban as a “violent act,” also stating, “British Cycling is a failed organisation. The racing scene is dying under your watch and all you do is take money from petrochemical companies and engage in culture wars.”
Asked about the legality of this issue whereby National Federations are deciding to change their guidelines from that of the UCI's current guidelines, Lappartient said that while he felt it would be better to gain consistency across the sport's rules, the UCI’s policy only governs its international calendar of events.
“We don’t have the power to decide about the national calendars or the national teams. If British Cycling, for example, wants to make a decision about its national competitions, it can. If it wants to make a decision for international competitions, it can’t. For example, British Cycling cannot decide the rules for Glasgow Worlds 2023 because that decision is in the hands of the UCI, but it can decide who it wants to select within their national team based on their rules,” Lappartient said.
“They have two points in their hands [national calendar/national teams], but of course, it is better to be consistent between the UCI and the National Federations; otherwise, it is difficult for [everyone] to understand, or it creates a kind of tension between the different communities, and this is not what we want.”
The debate has reached a boiling point, not just in sports but across the US, as trans inclusion, healthcare, and safety have been at the centre of recent legislation in some states. In recent years, far-right conservative agendas have transformed the political landscape in the US, with laws banning transgender students from participating in sports consistent with their gender being passed in 21 states.
Austin Killips’ overall victory at the Tour of the Gila was met with backlash across social media platforms and British and US mainstream media.
“I don't want to be overly cynical, but I think that trans people in sports, we've seen what has happened politically, they are trying to find a wedge issue, and then immediately it spirals into trying to legislate trans people out of existence. We are seeing bans on [gender-affirming] healthcare for kids and making it almost impossible for adults to access it,” Killips said.
Lappartient suggested that the UCI has attempted to remain politically neutral, however, Cyclingnews asked if he felt that the current transgender policy in cycling, and any changes to it, could affect legislation across nations - and vice versa - if the current legislation in the US, for example, has, in part, led to the UCI to re-open the discussion transgender participation in sport.
“It’s a global question for the global Olympic movement. We always try, at the Olympic movement, the IOC and International Federations, to make our decision based on fact, to protect the athletes, and not based on political aspects because we are politically neutral. That is why we do not interfere with these kinds of topics. But, of course, in the UCI constitution, we have an article that mentions the law of different countries are higher than the UCI regulations, and we have to respect the laws of a country,” he said.
“If it is an international competition, you have the international regulations; our decisions are never based on political topics but on facts to protect the sport, and to protect, keep the vision of the Olympic Charter; to bring people together through sport, unity, diversity, inclusion, but also fair competition. Fair competition is not something that we can negotiate.”
Surveys
USA Cycling recently came under fire after it sent out a survey on transgender participation. Bicycling Magazine has reported that some have called the survey “dehumanising” and “unreliable” given its poor design. Some have called on the national sport governing body to rescind the survey and rethink how it approaches the discussion on transgender participation in the women’s category.
The survey, which is anonymous, was set up to collect the views of those who participate in UCI events in the United States. It asks those responding to identify their gender and cycling discipline, if they are familiar with the current UCI regulations, and agree or disagree with statements such as “At UCI events, transgender women should be eligible to compete in the women’s category if they transitioned before puberty.”
The survey states that the national sport governing body will transmit the aggregated data to the UCI. “USA Cycling wants to ensure that American event organizers, team management, and athletes impacted by the UCI Eligibility Regulations for Transgender Athletes have their voices heard as part of this review process.”
Cyclingnews asked Lappartient if the UCI had requested similar surveys from National Federations, but he did not directly respond. However, he noted that the UCI will not organise surveys at the global level. “Sometimes they are more about feelings and less about facts,” Lappartient said. "We know that the CPA organized a survey, something like this, last year."
”But from our side, we don’t want to open a global survey like this. If you do this, you must stick to the conclusion of this, and we want to make a decision that will respect some principles.”
Cyclingnews reached out to the CPA regarding its survey last year to ask for the results, including how many received and responded to the survey, whether they were UCI licenced and members of CPA-only, what discipline and category, and what questions were asked, but it did not provide more information about its survey at that time.
Lappartient said he expects that USA Cycling will forward the results of its survey to the UCI but that the UCI will not base its decision on potential changes to the transgender policy, specifically on those results. Cyclingnews asked him about the unreliability of the USA Cycling survey, given how it was designed and that anonymous respondents, who might not be members of the organisation, can fill it out multiple times.
“That’s why we have to look at these carefully. When the CPA did their survey with their own athletes, it’s different, If you go in and fill out the survey 10 times, it will affect the results and the credibility of the survey,” Lappartient said.
Cyclingnews spoke with The Cyclists’ Alliance (TCA), an organization that represents the women’s peloton and that is known for surveying its members on important issues in sport; it said it will not issue a survey on the subject of transgender participation in women’s category of cycling.
“We do surveys quite often and have a good response rate from the peloton, but this topic is very different," TCA's co-founder Iris Slappendel said. "It's a very complicated subject, and I don't think you can break it down into a few questions, especially not without getting sufficient and objective background information to the riders first. When we develop a wider strategy on this topic, then it would involve much more discussion and deeper conversation with both transgender riders and TCA members.”
